SAFER SKIES Act

Bill Number

S. 3481

Origin Chamber

Senate

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Crime and Law Enforcement

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-12-15: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Last Updated

2026-04-02T16:34:00Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The SAFER SKIES Act aims to enhance public safety and security by expanding the use of counter-unmanned aircraft system (counter-UAS) technologies—tools designed to detect, disrupt, or disable drones—to state, local, Tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement and correctional agencies. It builds on existing federal authorities to address growing threats from drones to people, events, critical infrastructure (like power plants or transportation hubs), and prisons, while ensuring oversight to prevent misuse.

Key Provisions

• Expanded Authorities for Counter-UAS Use:
• Federal agencies (Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice) retain existing powers to mitigate drone threats to covered facilities, public safety, or law enforcement.
• SLTT law enforcement and correctional agencies gain authority to use specific counter-UAS actions (e.g., detecting, disrupting communications, seizing, or disabling drones) against credible threats to people, large public events, critical infrastructure, or correctional facilities, but only after completing mandatory training and using approved technologies.

• Training and Certification Requirements:
• SLTT personnel must undergo training and certification by the Attorney General (in coordination with Homeland Security, Defense, and Transportation departments) through a national program. This includes legal, operational, and technical instruction.
• Only certified officers can use certain disruptive methods (e.g., jamming signals or seizing drones).
• Agencies must use technologies from a jointly approved list by federal agencies, including the FCC and NTIA (agencies overseeing communications).

• Oversight and Reporting:
• SLTT agencies must notify federal authorities within 48 hours of any counter-UAS action, detailing the threat, location, method used, and effects.
• Biannual reports to Congress on training, certifications, deployments, incidents, and recommendations for improving protections.
• Periodic compliance audits by the Attorney General and Homeland Security to prevent abuse.
• Authorities expire in 2031 (federal in September, SLTT in December).

• Funding and Equipment:
• Amends crime control grant programs to allow SLTT agencies to use federal funds for purchasing and operating drones for public safety and approved counter-UAS systems.
• Requires a plan for reimbursing federal agencies that provide counter-UAS support to non-federal events.

• Penalties and Enforcement:
• Increases criminal penalties for drone misuse, such as repeat violations in restricted airspace (up to 5 years imprisonment), using drones in felonies (doubles sentence or adds 5 years), or smuggling contraband into prisons via drones (adds 5 years).
• Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to raise base offense levels for drone-related crimes (by 4-6 levels).
• Imposes fines up to $100,000 or suspension of authority for unauthorized counter-UAS actions without federal coordination.
• Attorney General can pursue civil enforcement in federal court.

• Rulemaking and Implementation:
• Federal agencies must issue regulations within 180 days on SLTT counter-UAS use, coordinating with the FAA on aviation safety.
• Defines terms like "correctional facility" (jails, prisons, or detention centers) and "critical infrastructure" (essential systems like energy or water supplies).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Amends Section 210G of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to explicitly include SLTT agencies, which previously only covered federal entities; adds training mandates, notification rules, and technology restrictions not previously required.
• Overrides certain federal aviation and communications laws (e.g., prohibitions on interfering with aircraft or signals) for authorized counter-UAS actions, but limits this to specific threats.
• Updates grant laws (Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act) to explicitly fund counter-UAS tools for SLTT use, expanding beyond general public safety equipment.
• Introduces new forfeiture rules for drones seized by SLTT agencies under local laws and enhanced sentencing guidelines for drone crimes, which were not previously specified.
• Exempts Coast Guard counter-UAS activities outside the U.S. from certain criminal laws.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Enhances coordination between federal (DHS, DOJ, FAA) and SLTT entities, potentially straining resources for training, audits, and reporting but improving overall drone threat response. Federal agencies may see increased reimbursement demands for event support.
• On Citizens: Improves security at public events, infrastructure, and prisons, reducing risks from malicious drones (e.g., smuggling or surveillance). However, could indirectly affect lawful drone users (e.g., hobbyists) through stricter penalties and potential disruptions.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but the exemption for Coast Guard overseas operations could support U.S. maritime security efforts abroad without conflicting with international aviation norms.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• SLTT Law Enforcement and Correctional Agencies: Gain new tools and funding but face training, reporting, and compliance burdens.
• Federal Agencies: DHS, DOJ, DOD, DOT, FAA, FCC, and NTIA handle expanded oversight, training, and technology approvals.
• Critical Infrastructure Owners and Event Organizers: Benefit from better local protections against drone threats.
• Drone Operators and Manufacturers: Face heightened penalties for misuse; manufacturers must ensure products meet approved lists for counter-UAS tech.
• Inmates and Prison Operators: Stronger measures against drone-based contraband smuggling.
• Congress and the Public: Receive reports for accountability; citizens at large events or near infrastructure gain indirect safety benefits.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Balances security needs with aviation safety by requiring FAA coordination and limiting actions to "credible threats," potentially reducing liability for authorized uses while imposing clear penalties for overreach. The severability clause ensures the law remains intact if parts are challenged.
• Constitutional: Raises privacy concerns from drone interception (e.g., signal disruption), but includes limits on accessing non-public communications to align with Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. Overrides federal laws selectively, which could invite court tests on federalism (state vs. federal authority).
• Political: Bipartisan support (introduced by Sens. Peters, Grassley, Johnson, Cortez Masto) reflects growing consensus on drone threats post-incidents like prison smuggling or event disruptions. Sunsets in 2031 allow future review, but expands local powers amid debates on federal overreach in emerging tech like drones.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]

Cosponsors (3)

Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA], Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI], Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]

Recent Actions

• 2025-12-15: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
• 2025-12-15: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

• SAFER SKIES Act — issued 2025-12-15 — PDF (21 pages)

Related Bills

• S. 1071 (119th Congress)